Impressive? Sure...(Newbies Heads Up!)

[APG]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

My buddy who pointed this out to me asked me if it would be the same tech in the NBA...I said who knows?? They let you do all kinds of weird stuff in that league!

This is an illegal assist in scoring violation in the NBA rather than a T...ball goes to the opponent at the FT line extended.

[stiffler3492]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

This is an illegal assist in scoring violation in the NBA rather than a T...ball goes to the opponent at the FT line extended.

Nice. I just wish they would make every rule set the same.

[APG]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

Nice. I just wish they would make every rule set the same.

Not practical nor needed...different levels have different goals and end games. In reality, compared to the other rules sets, basketball is pretty similar. Football is a whole other matter. I've seen that there's up to 300 rules differences just between the NFL and NCAA...and NF does things that don't even make sense to me.

[APG]

Also here's your rules citation

Rule 10, Section 3 Player Technical
A player shall not:

ART. 6...Commit an unsporting foul. This includes, but is not limited to, acts or conduct such as:
e. Climbing on or lifting a teammate to secure greater height.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Climbing on or lifting a teammate to secure greater height.

So? Who gets charged with the technical foul, the climber, the lifter, or both?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

So? Who gets charged with the technical foul, the climber, the lifter, or both?

Who jumped on a teammate's back? That seems to answer my question.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Not practical nor needed...different levels have different goals and end games. In reality, compared to the other rules sets, basketball is pretty similar. Football is a whole other matter. I've seen that there's up to 300 rules differences just between the NFL and NCAA...and NF does things that don't even make sense to me.

Why isn't it practical? Many of the differences that do exist have nothing to do with the different end goals of the various levels. It wouldn't be difficult to bring them all into alignment under a single body with sub-sections to differentiate where it makes sense (length of game, 3-point line distance, uniform requirements, etc.).

There is no good reason for any of the basic definitions, fouls, or violations to be any different.

[stiffler3492]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Why isn't it practical? Many of the differences that do exist have nothing to do with the different end goals of the various levels. It wouldn't be difficult to bring them all into alignment under a single body with sub-sections to differentiate where it makes sense (length of game, 3-point line distance, uniform requirements, etc.).

There is no good reason for any of the basic definitions, fouls, or violations to be any different.

Totally agree Camron. Couldn't have said it better.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Why isn't it practical? Many of the differences that do exist have nothing to do with the different end goals of the various levels. It wouldn't be difficult to bring them all into alignment under a single body with sub-sections to differentiate where it makes sense (length of game, 3-point line distance, uniform requirements, etc.).

There is no good reason for any of the basic definitions, fouls, or violations to be any different.

While this is true, there's no compelling reason that's going to get the various councils, committees, and poohbahs to relinquish control to change rules. Some of the differences are fairly significant (backcourt, for example, between FIBA and NFHS), while others are less so ("intentional" vs "unsporting").

Time outs, for example, are simply a part of the strategy of the American game.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

While this is true, there's no compelling reason that's going to get the various councils, committees, and poohbahs to relinquish control to change rules. Some of the differences are fairly significant (backcourt, for example, between FIBA and NFHS), while others are less so ("intentional" vs "unsporting").

Time outs, for example, are simply a part of the strategy of the American game.

It's because of timeouts that you can tie 80% of NBE games at 84 and put 2:00 on the clock.

[APG]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

It's because of timeouts that you can tie 80% of NBE games at 84 and put 2:00 on the clock.

I dunno how timeouts in the NBA in the first 46 minutes help keep games close? Heck, most of the called timeouts are mandatory anyhow. I could see how being able to advance the ball under two minutes in the 4th could help a team come back, but doesn't FIBA also allow an advance?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

While this is true, there's no compelling reason that's going to get the various councils, committees, and poohbahs to relinquish control to change rules. Some of the differences are fairly significant (backcourt, for example, between FIBA and NFHS), while others are less so ("intentional" vs "unsporting").

Time outs, for example, are simply a part of the strategy of the American game.

They may be different, but there is no good reason for them to be so. Just pick one and go with it.

The biggest reason they will never merge is that none of the organizaitons would ever want to relinquish any of the control/power they currently have. Even within the NCAA, the men and women have different rules sets.....for no good reason.

[hoopguy]

On this play T to the jumper is what I call but....

I would like the rule to be changed or reworded so that both players get the T. Both are culprits and should be penalized in my opinion.

Who would get the T if one player literally lifted(think cheerleading) the other player by the waist and threw him up to dunk? Still the dunker? I just think they both should be penalized but the way the rule is now I would only penalize one player.

The reality of this play is that it only happens when the game has gotten to be a joke so it really is not a problem to T up both players if you go with that call. I have seen it twice and both were in fool around middle school 'all star' games.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by camron rust

they may be different, but there is no good reason for them to be so. Just pick one and go with it.

The biggest reason they will never merge is that none of the organizaitons would ever want to relinquish any of the control/power they currently have money they generate by selling their own rules and mechanics. Even within the ncaa, the men and women have different rules sets.....for no good reason.

jmho.

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Why isn't it practical? Many of the differences that do exist have nothing to do with the different end goals of the various levels. It wouldn't be difficult to bring them all into alignment under a single body with sub-sections to differentiate where it makes sense (length of game, 3-point line distance, uniform requirements, etc.).

There is no good reason for any of the basic definitions, fouls, or violations to be any different.

So, you think the NBA will go to 2 20 minute halves? Or should the Fed go to 4 12 minute quarters? Maybe 6 fouls for a DQ in college? Don't tell me the trapezoid is coming!